Personal Argument – PHIL1037 S1 2023

Introductory Reflection

The claim I shall argue for is that zoos are predominantly bad for conservation efforts, and a more
efficacious solution is needed. Zoos are facilities that house and exhibit animals for public viewing and
education. The 3 main reasons I shall give in defence of this claim are:

(1) Zoos struggle to re-establish a population in the wild from captive breeding ('ex situ') programs.
(Snyder et al. 1996). Ex situ programs involve multiple issues, including failure to reach self-
sustaining levels or loss of genetic diversity. This is due to lack of understanding of the ecological
requirements and inadequate conditions. The captivity of animals in zoos negatively impacts
physiological health and psychological behaviour, including feeding and mating patterns, which will
hinder long-term viability in the wild (Martin et al. 1996; Fischer & Lindenmayer 2000; Williams &
Hoffman 2009).

(2) The ulterior motives of a zoos conflict with conservation efforts. Zoos focus on entertainment and
education rather than conservation. This generates a public impression that it is acceptable to keep
animals in captivity for entertainment and revenue, rather than addressing the issues that threaten
their natural habitats and populations. Zoos are not breeding animals with the intent of conservation.
Animals attract visitors through the gates and the façade of breeding gives the public a false sense of
security about conservation (PETA n.d.).

(3) Zoos and ex situ programs cannot address the root causes of extinction, such as habitat
destruction, pollution, and climate change, and can only provide temporary relief. It is nearly
impossible for animals confined in zoos to be released into natural habitats and captive breeding is
redundant without wild conservation (PETA n.d.; Dolman et al. 2015). Instead, we need to address
the underlying social, economic, and political factors that drives biodiversity loss (Mathews et al.
2005).

In the visual argument, I shall focus on the main claim and reason (2)

My conclusion, that zoos are predominantly bad for conservation efforts, is a relatively conservative claim.
Since the aim of my argument calls for a reformation of the status quo, I needed to ensure my claim was
credible by providing evidence and statistics from academic articles rather than dogmatically stating it.

Word count: 360

Standardisation

C: Zoos are impractical for conservation efforts and various reforms should be made to the status quo to
allow for more effective in situ conservation services.

1. Zoos do more harm than good for conservation

1.1 The value of captive breeding is reliant on its potential to repopulate the wild. Yet Kristen
Jule says that "animals in captivity do not usually have the natural behaviours needed for
success in the wild".
1.2 Captive elephants have half the lifespan of their wild counterparts: 18.9 years v. 41.7 years
for Asian elephants and 16.9 years v. 35.8 years for African elephants. Another study
commissioned by the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs found that
71 of 77 elephants in 13 zoos were overweight and spent 83% of their time indoors (Clubb
et al. 2008; Sample 2008).
1.3 Zoo animals display neurotic behaviour endemic to ex situ programs like anxiety,
depression, and obsessive-compulsive disorder due to the nature of the surrounding
conditions. Examples include tiny enclosures and the introduction of concepts that are
foreign in the wild, such as intrusive human observers.

[Sub-premises 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 are Linked]

2. Zoos prioritise entertainment and profit over conservation

2.1 Mimi Bekhechi, director of international programs at PETA says that zoos are "prisons for
animals, camouflaging their cruelty with conservation claims". Zoos began as
amusements, and they still exist today as profit-driven industries that exploit to make
money.
2.2 Although zoos do invest in conservation programs, the amount is tiny compared to the
profits being generated, or the vast sums spent on animals. Investments for in situ or local
conservation efforts represented less than five percent of the total income of zoos in the
USA (Fa et al. 2011).

[Sub-premises 2.1 and 2.2 are Convergent]

3. Zoos are unable to address the root causes of extinction

3.1 It is nearly impossible for animals confined in zoos to be released into the wild from ex
situ programs due to the harmful nature of the conditions experienced. Dr Chris Draper
says that release to the wild is not for the best of the animal and the damage was done
when that animal was taken from the wild.
 3.2 Captive breeding is redundant without wild conservation as they are unable to ensure a
viable wild population. Captive-bred animals released into the wild will have an
evolutionary disadvantage, failing to inherit behaviours that could influence their viability
in the wild.

[Sub-premises 3.1 and 3.2 are Linked]

[Premises 1, 2 and 3 are Convergent]

Visual Argument
Sources & References

Clubb et al. 2008, ‘Compromised Survivorship in Zoo Elephants’, Science, accessed 9 April 2023,
322(5908): 1649

Cormier Z n.d., ‘Can captive animals ever truly return to the wild?’, BBC Earth, accessed 9 April 2023.
<https://www.bbcearth.com/news/can-captive-animals-ever-truly-return-to-the-wild>

Dolman et al. 2015, ‘Ark or park: the need to predict relative effectiveness of ex situ and in situ conservation
before attempting captive breeding’, Journal of Applied Ecology, accessed 7 April 2023, 52(4):841-850.

Draven J 2017, ‘Hot topic: is it time for zoos to be banned?’, National Geographic Traveller (UK), accessed
7 April 2023. <https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/travel/2017/05/hot-topic-is-it-time-for-zoos-to-be-
banned>

Fa et al. 2011, Zoo conservation biology, Cambridge University Press, accessed 9 April 2023.

Fischer & Lindenmayer 2000, ‘An assessment of the published results of animal relocations’, Biological
Conservation, accessed 8 April 2023, 96(1):1-11.

Lansdowne M 2015, ‘Captivity is Not the Answer, Because Captive Animals Do Not Breed With Their
Wild Counterparts’, One Green Planet, accessed 8 April 2023.
<https://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/captive-bred-animals-are-just-not-that-into-their-wild-
counterparts/>

Loh et al. 2018, ‘Quantifying the contribution of zoos and aquariums to peer-reviewed scientific research’,
FACETS, accessed 8 April 2023, 3:287–299.

Martin et al. 1996, ‘Mammal and bird species held in zoos are less endemic and less threatened than their
close relatives not held in zoos’, Animal Conservation, accessed 7 April 2023, 17(2):89-96.

Mathews et al. 2005, ‘Keeping fit on the ark: assessing the suitability of captive-bred animals for release’,
Biological Conservation, accessed 8 April 2023, 121(4): 569-577.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) n.d., Don’t zoos help to preserve endangered species?,
PETA, accessed 7 April 2023. <https://www.peta.org/about-peta/faq/dont-zoos-help-to-preserve-
endangered-species/>

Prideaux M 2016, ‘Zoos are the problem, not the solution to animal conservation’, openDemocracy,
accessed 7 April 2023. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/transformation/zoos-are-problem-not-solution-
to-animal-conservation/

ProCon.org 2021, Zoos – Top 3 Pros and Cons, ProCon.org, accessed 9 April 2023.
<https://www.procon.org/headlines/zoos-top-3-pros-and-cons/>
Sample I 2008, ‘Stress and lack of exercise are killing elephants, zoos warned’, The Guardian, accessed 7
April 2023. <https://www.theguardian.com/science/2008/dec/12/elephants-animal-welfare>

Snyder et al. 1996, ‘Limitations of Captive Breeding in Endangered Species Recovery’, Conservation
Biology, accessed 8 April 2023, 10(2):338-348.

University of East Anglia 2015, "Critically endangered species should be left to breed in the wild."
ScienceDaily, accessed 4 June 2015. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/06/150604203450.htm>

Ward S 2016, ‘In defence of zoos: how captivity helps conservation’, The Conversation, accessed 8 April
2023. <https://theconversation.com/in-defence-of-zoos-how-captivity-helps-conservation-56719>

Williams & Hoffman 2009, ‘Minimizing genetic adaptation in captive breeding programs: A review’,
Biological Conservation, accessed 8 April 2023, 142(11):2388-2400.